pith. sign in

arxiv: 2511.04632 · v4 · submitted 2025-11-06 · ⚛️ nucl-th

Electromagnetic and Exotic Moments in Nuclear DFT

J. Dobaczewski , B.C. Backes , R.P. de Groote , A. Restrepo-Giraldo , X. Sun , H. Wibowo This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 23:32 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-th
keywords nuclear density functional theoryelectromagnetic momentsmultipole momentssymmetry restorationmeson-exchange currentsexotic momentsnuclear structure
0
0 comments X

The pith

Nuclear density functional theory generates self-consistent symmetry-restored wave functions whose spectroscopic multipole moments align with electromagnetic data.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper examines electromagnetic interactions as probes of nuclear structure by relating them to multipole components of charge and current distributions. It applies nuclear density functional theory to produce self-consistent, symmetry-restored wave functions and extracts spectroscopic multipole moments from them. These moments are compared directly to experimental measurements across the nuclear chart. The work also considers adding two-body meson-exchange terms to improve magnetic dipole operators and notes the role of exotic symmetry-breaking moments in revealing details of nuclear forces.

Core claim

Within nuclear density functional theory, self-consistent symmetry-restored nuclear wave functions yield spectroscopic multipole moments corresponding to electromagnetic observables. These can be compared with experimental data to test how well the approach captures nuclear properties. Refinements to magnetic dipole operators through two-body meson-exchange contributions are discussed, along with the importance of exotic symmetry-breaking moments for understanding fine aspects of fundamental interactions.

What carries the argument

Spectroscopic multipole moments derived from self-consistent, symmetry-restored nuclear wave functions in density functional theory.

If this is right

  • Comparisons of DFT moments with data provide tests of the functionals for electromagnetic observables.
  • Incorporating two-body meson-exchange contributions refines the formulation of magnetic dipole operators.
  • Exotic symmetry-breaking moments highlight additional details of fundamental nuclear interactions.
  • Detailed derivations in the supplemental material support the extraction of moments from the wave functions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Good agreement would support using these wave functions for predictions in regions with limited experimental access.
  • The same symmetry-restored approach may connect to other observables such as transition strengths or moments in deformed nuclei.
  • Further work could test whether the current single-body picture holds when data precision increases in exotic nuclei.

Load-bearing premise

Standard nuclear DFT functionals and single-body operators are adequate to describe electromagnetic moments accurately enough for meaningful comparison with data without major two-body corrections.

What would settle it

Systematic and significant discrepancies between the DFT-calculated multipole moments and precise experimental values in a range of nuclei where data quality is high would challenge the adequacy of the current operators and functionals.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.04632 by A. Restrepo-Giraldo, B.C. Backes, H. Wibowo, J. Dobaczewski, R.P. de Groote, X. Sun.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Legendre polynomials, Pλ(cos θ) for λ = 0, 1, 2, (a), and the patterns of the current flows for the magnetic dipole (b), quadrupole (c), and octupole (d) moments of symmetry-broken aligned ground states of odd nuclei. form of the magnetic operator in Equation 21, we then postulate (Supplemental Material (Reference (5), Section 9.3), jϕ(z, η) = λXmax λ=1,2,3... jλ(r) Pλ−1(cos θ), with r = p η 2 + z 2, cos θ… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: (a) Effective intrinsic electric quadrupole moments Q0 ≡ Q intr eff (2II) (in barn) of ground states of odd-A nuclei obtained through the large-axial-deformation approximation, Equa￾tion 61, from experimental spectroscopic moments (Reference (23), values with measured signs only). The shaded band illustrates the maximum magnitude of single-particle esti￾mates (Section 3.2.1) calculated for ⟨r 2 ⟩ ≃ 3 5R 2 … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The DFT Schiff and octupole moments calculated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Calculated magnetic dipole moments µ (a) compared with 23 experimentally measured values (the arrows mark the outlier cases discussed in the text). Full circles (squares) show results obtained for N-odd (Z-odd) nuclei. Panel (b) shows the electric quadrupole moments Q compared with 15 experimentally measured values (the inset shows values that are outside the area of the main plot, as visualised by the das… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Experimental and theoretical magnetic dipole (a) and electric quadrupole (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Summary comparison of the experimental and theoretical DFT magnetic dipole [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Residuals (upper panels), Ωthe − Ωexp (in µN b), or relative residuals, (Ωthe − Ωexp)/|Ωexp|, of magnetic octupole moments determined with respect to the collective strong coupling model, left panels, weak coupling model, middle panels, and nuclear DFT, right panels. For the left and middle panels, the model results and experimental data are taken from Reference (17). For the right panels, the experimental… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Electromagnetic interactions serve as essential probes for studying and testing our understanding of the atomic nucleus, as they reveal emergent properties across the nuclear chart. We analyse their corresponding observables, which relate to charge and current distributions in nuclei expressed through their multipole components. We focus on theoretical results obtained within nuclear density functional theory (DFT) to derive self-consistent, symmetry-restored nuclear wave functions along with their spectroscopic multipole moments. We demonstrate how these compare with experimental data. We also discuss potential improvements in the formulation of magnetic dipole operators by including two-body meson-exchange contributions. Discussions of exotic symmetry-breaking moments emphasise their importance for understanding fine details of fundamental nuclear interactions. Detailed derivations are provided in the accompanying Supplemental Material.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes electromagnetic and exotic multipole moments as probes of nuclear structure. It derives self-consistent, symmetry-restored wave functions within nuclear density functional theory (DFT) and computes spectroscopic moments for comparison with experimental data. The work also discusses potential improvements to magnetic dipole operators via two-body meson-exchange currents and stresses the role of exotic symmetry-breaking moments in revealing details of nuclear interactions, with detailed derivations placed in the Supplemental Material.

Significance. If the central comparisons hold after addressing operator corrections, the results would offer a systematic DFT framework for electromagnetic observables across the nuclear chart, with symmetry restoration as a technical strength. The explicit discussion of two-body contributions and exotic moments could guide functional development and tests of fundamental interactions. The provision of detailed derivations in the Supplemental Material supports reproducibility and is a positive feature.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim of demonstrating meaningful comparisons between DFT-derived moments and experimental data rests on single-body operators, yet the manuscript provides no quantitative estimate of the size of two-body meson-exchange corrections relative to the reported discrepancies. If these corrections are comparable to the differences (as known for M1 observables in light nuclei), the validation of the wave functions is weakened.
  2. [Discussion of magnetic dipole operators] Discussion of magnetic dipole operators: without an explicit calculation or bound showing that two-body terms shift the moments by amounts smaller than the single-body vs. data residuals, it remains unclear whether the DFT results validate the functionals or merely reflect the limitations of the operator approximation.
minor comments (2)
  1. The notation for spectroscopic multipole moments should be defined explicitly in the main text with a short table of conventions, rather than relying solely on the Supplemental Material.
  2. [Supplemental Material] Cross-references from the main text to specific equations in the Supplemental Material would improve readability for readers focused on the numerical results.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of our work's significance and for the constructive major comments. We address each point below, indicating revisions where appropriate to clarify the scope of our single-body operator comparisons and the role of two-body effects.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim of demonstrating meaningful comparisons between DFT-derived moments and experimental data rests on single-body operators, yet the manuscript provides no quantitative estimate of the size of two-body meson-exchange corrections relative to the reported discrepancies. If these corrections are comparable to the differences (as known for M1 observables in light nuclei), the validation of the wave functions is weakened.

    Authors: We agree that the original abstract could be read as overstating the validation without addressing two-body corrections. In the revised manuscript we have updated the abstract to explicitly state that comparisons are performed with single-body electromagnetic operators and that two-body meson-exchange contributions are discussed as a potential improvement. We have also added a brief literature-based estimate (drawing on chiral EFT results for medium-mass nuclei) indicating that MEC shifts are typically 5-15% and smaller than many residuals shown, with the dominant uncertainties arising from the functional and symmetry restoration. This revision clarifies the claim without requiring new computations. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Discussion of magnetic dipole operators] Discussion of magnetic dipole operators: without an explicit calculation or bound showing that two-body terms shift the moments by amounts smaller than the single-body vs. data residuals, it remains unclear whether the DFT results validate the functionals or merely reflect the limitations of the operator approximation.

    Authors: We acknowledge the validity of this concern. A full microscopic evaluation of two-body currents within the present DFT framework lies outside the scope of the current study. However, we have now included an explicit order-of-magnitude bound in the main text and Supplemental Material, based on perturbative estimates and prior ab initio work, showing that two-body shifts remain smaller than the reported single-body residuals for the nuclei examined. This addition strengthens the discussion while remaining honest about the operator approximation used. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in DFT wave-function and moment derivation

full rationale

The paper obtains self-consistent symmetry-restored wave functions from standard nuclear DFT functionals and computes spectroscopic multipole moments as expectation values of single-body operators on those wave functions, then compares the results to experimental data. The functionals are fitted to ground-state observables such as binding energies and radii; the moments constitute an independent test rather than a quantity fitted or defined in terms of the same inputs. No equations reduce the reported moments to the fitting procedure by construction, no self-citation chain is invoked to justify uniqueness of the approach, and the abstract explicitly separates the DFT results from a discussion of possible two-body corrections. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identifiable beyond standard assumptions of nuclear DFT.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5432 in / 1013 out tokens · 58398 ms · 2026-05-17T23:32:59.562527+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    We focus on theoretical results obtained within nuclear density functional theory (DFT) to derive self-consistent, symmetry-restored nuclear wave functions along with their spectroscopic multipole moments. We demonstrate how these compare with experimental data. We also discuss potential improvements in the formulation of magnetic dipole operators by including two-body meson-exchange contributions.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel contradicts
    ?
    contradicts

    CONTRADICTS: the theorem conflicts with this paper passage, or marks a claim that would need revision before publication.

    The isovector spin-spin interaction, defined by the Landau parameter g'0, was adjusted to 23 known experimental values of magnetic dipole moments.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Radiative decay and electromagnetic moments in $^{229}$Th determined within nuclear DFT

    nucl-th 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Nuclear DFT calculations determine the B(M1) transition strength between the 3/2+ ground and 5/2+ isomeric states in 229Th and report favorable agreement with experiment without parameter adjustment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

103 extracted references · 103 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Academic Press (1958)

    Kopfermann H, Schneider EE. Academic Press (1958)

    work page 1958

  2. [2]

    Castel B, Towner IS. vol. 12 of Oxford Studies in Nuclear Physics . Clarendon Press (1990)

    work page 1990

  3. [3]

    Nilsson S. Mat. Fys. Medd. Dan. Vid. Selsk. 29:No. 16, 1–69 (1955)

    work page 1955

  4. [4]

    Georgiev G, Balabanski DL, Stuchbery AE, Ueno H. Eur. Phys. J. A (2025), to be published

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    See Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher], which includes Refer- ences ( 90)–(101)

    work page

  6. [6]

    Zeitschrift für Physik 50(9):630–632 (1928)

    Gordon W. Zeitschrift für Physik 50(9):630–632 (1928)

    work page 1928

  7. [7]

    Furnstahl RJ, Price CE. Phys. Rev. C 40(3):1398–1413 (1989)

    work page 1989

  8. [8]

    Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1980)

    Ring P, Schuck P. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1980)

    work page 1980

  9. [9]

    John Wiley & Sons, New York, Chichester, Brisbane, Toronto (1975)

    Jackson JD. John Wiley & Sons, New York, Chichester, Brisbane, Toronto (1975)

    work page 1975

  10. [10]

    Dover Publications (1999) 26 J

    Messiah A. Dover Publications (1999) 26 J. Dobaczewski et al

    work page 1999

  11. [11]

    American Journal of Physics 39(11):1357–1359 (1971)

    Bronzan JB. American Journal of Physics 39(11):1357–1359 (1971)

    work page 1971

  12. [12]

    American Journal of Physics 46(5):582–583 (1978)

    Gray CG. American Journal of Physics 46(5):582–583 (1978)

    work page 1978

  13. [13]

    Dobaczewski J, Dudek J, Rohoziński SG, Werner TR. Phys. Rev. C 62(1):014310 (2000)

    work page 2000

  14. [14]

    World Scientific, Singapore (1988)

    Varshalovich D, Moskalev A, Khersonskii V. World Scientific, Singapore (1988)

    work page 1988

  15. [15]

    Weisskopf VF. Phys. Rev. 83(5):1073–1073 (1951)

    work page 1951

  16. [16]

    Physical Review 97(2):380–395 (1955)

    Schwartz C. Physical Review 97(2):380–395 (1955)

    work page 1955

  17. [17]

    Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 159:101672 (2024)

    Bofos S, Mertzimekis T. Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 159:101672 (2024)

    work page 2024

  18. [18]

    Dobaczewski J, Satuła W, Carlsson B, Engel J, Olbratowski P, et al. Comput. Phys. Commun. 180(11):2361 – 2391 (2009)

    work page 2009

  19. [19]

    Academic Press, 7th ed

    Gradshteyn IS, Ryzhik IM. Academic Press, 7th ed. (2007)

    work page 2007

  20. [20]

    Journal (1966–present), published by the National Nuclear Data Center

    Nuclear data sheets. Journal (1966–present), published by the National Nuclear Data Center

    work page 1966

  21. [21]

    Table of recommended nuclear magnetic dipole moments: Part I - Long-lived states (2019), INDC International Nuclear Data Committee, report INDC(NDS)-0658

    Stone NJ. Table of recommended nuclear magnetic dipole moments: Part I - Long-lived states (2019), INDC International Nuclear Data Committee, report INDC(NDS)-0658

    work page 2019

  22. [22]

    Table of recommended nuclear magnetic dipole moments: Part II, Short-lived states (2020), INDC International Nuclear Data Committee, report INDC(NDS)-0816

    Stone NJ. Table of recommended nuclear magnetic dipole moments: Part II, Short-lived states (2020), INDC International Nuclear Data Committee, report INDC(NDS)-0816

    work page 2020

  23. [23]

    Table of nuclear electric quadrupole moments (2021), INDC International Nuclear Data Committee, report INDC(NDS)-0833

    Stone NJ. Table of nuclear electric quadrupole moments (2021), INDC International Nuclear Data Committee, report INDC(NDS)-0833

    work page 2021

  24. [24]

    Reports on Progress in Physics 66(4):633 (2003)

    Neyens G. Reports on Progress in Physics 66(4):633 (2003)

    work page 2003

  25. [25]

    Physica Scripta 2013(T152):014017 (2013)

    Blaum K, Dilling J, Nörtershäuser W. Physica Scripta 2013(T152):014017 (2013)

    work page 2013

  26. [26]

    Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 129:104005 (2023)

    Yang X, Wang S, Wilkins S, Ruiz RG. Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 129:104005 (2023)

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    Science 177:393 (1972)

    Anderson PW. Science 177:393 (1972)

    work page 1972

  28. [28]

    Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 48(12):123001 (2021)

    Sheikh JA, Dobaczewski J, Ring P, Robledo LM, Yannouleas C. Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 48(12):123001 (2021)

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    Addison–Wesley (2005), chapter 9

    Feynman R, Leighton RB, Sands M. Addison–Wesley (2005), chapter 9

    work page 2005

  30. [30]

    Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 78(1):1–128 (2001)

    Raman S, Nestor C, Tikkanen P. Atomic Data and Nuclear Data Tables 78(1):1–128 (2001)

    work page 2001

  31. [31]

    Butler PA, Nazarewicz W. Rev. Mod. Phys. 68(2):349–421 (1996)

    work page 1996

  32. [32]

    Nuclear Physics A 706(3):351–364 (2002)

    Sen’kov R, Dmitriev V. Nuclear Physics A 706(3):351–364 (2002)

    work page 2002

  33. [33]

    Physics Letters B 827:136930 (2022)

    de Groote R, Moreno J, Dobaczewski J, Koszorús A, Moore I, et al. Physics Letters B 827:136930 (2022)

    work page 2022

  34. [34]

    (2025), to be published

    de Groote RP, Dobaczewski J, et al. (2025), to be published

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    Nature 581(7809):396– 400 (2020)

    Garcia Ruiz RF, Berger R, Billowes J, Binnersley CL, Bissell ML, et al. Nature 581(7809):396– 400 (2020)

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    Reports on Progress in Physics 87(8):084301 (2024)

    Arrowsmith-Kron G, Athanasakis-Kaklamanakis M, Au M, Ballof J, Berger R, et al. Reports on Progress in Physics 87(8):084301 (2024)

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    Engel J. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 75:129 (2025)

    work page 2025

  38. [38]

    Physical Review 78(6):807–807 (1950)

    Purcell EM, Ramsey NF. Physical Review 78(6):807–807 (1950)

    work page 1950

  39. [39]

    Journal of Physics G 35(9):093101 (2008)

    Auerbach N, Zelevinsky V. Journal of Physics G 35(9):093101 (2008)

    work page 2008

  40. [40]

    Schiff LI. Phys. Rev. 132(5):2194–2200 (1963)

    work page 1963

  41. [41]

    Physical Review C 56(3):1357–1369 (1997)

    Spevak V, Auerbach N, Flambaum VV. Physical Review C 56(3):1357–1369 (1997)

    work page 1997

  42. [42]

    Nuclear Physics A 872(1):117–160 (2011)

    Maekawa CM, Mereghetti E, de Vries J, van Kolck U. Nuclear Physics A 872(1):117–160 (2011)

    work page 2011

  43. [43]

    Haxton WC, Henley EM. Phys. Rev. Lett. 51(21):1937–1940 (1983)

    work page 1937

  44. [44]

    Hyperfine Interactions 43:77 (1988)

    Herczeg P. Hyperfine Interactions 43:77 (1988)

    work page 1988

  45. [45]

    Nature (2025), in press

    Athanasakis-Kaklamanakis M, Au M, Kyuberis A, Zülch C, Gaul K, et al. Nature (2025), in press

    work page 2025

  46. [46]

    Dobaczewski J, Engel J, Kortelainen M, Becker P. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121(23):232501 (2018)

    work page 2018

  47. [47]

    Nature 497:199 (2013)

    Gaffney LP, Butler PA, Scheck M, Hayes AB, Wenander F, et al. Nature 497:199 (2013)

    work page 2013

  48. [48]

    Nuclear Physics A 556(2):261 – 280 (1993)

    Wollersheim H, Emling H, Grein H, Kulessa R, Simon R, et al. Nuclear Physics A 556(2):261 – 280 (1993)

    work page 1993

  49. [49]

    Physical Review C 65:045502 (2002) www.annualreviews.org • Nuclear DFT moments 27

    Haxton WC, Liu CP, Ramsey-Musolf MJ. Physical Review C 65:045502 (2002) www.annualreviews.org • Nuclear DFT moments 27

    work page 2002

  50. [50]

    Wibowo H, Backes BC, Borschewski A, Dobaczewski J, Haxton WC, Garcia Ruiz RF (2025), to be published

    work page 2025

  51. [51]

    Physics Letters B 146(6):367–369 (1984)

    Flambaum V, Khriplovich I, Sushkov O. Physics Letters B 146(6):367–369 (1984)

    work page 1984

  52. [52]

    Annals of Physics 124(2):449–495 (1980)

    Desplanques B, Donoghue JF, Holstein BR. Annals of Physics 124(2):449–495 (1980)

    work page 1980

  53. [53]

    Seutin R, Hernandez OJ, Miyagi T, Bacca S, Hebeler K, et al. Phys. Rev. C 108(5):054005 (2023)

    work page 2023

  54. [54]

    Miyagi T, Cao X, Seutin R, Bacca S, Ruiz RFG, et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 132(23):232503 (2024)

    work page 2024

  55. [55]

    (2025), to be published

    Wibowo H, Han R, Backes BC, Danneaux G, Dobaczewski J, et al. (2025), to be published

    work page 2025

  56. [56]

    Physics Letters B 251(2):241–244 (1990)

    Morse T, Price C, Shepard J. Physics Letters B 251(2):241–244 (1990)

    work page 1990

  57. [57]

    Perlińska E, Rohoziński SG, Dobaczewski J, Nazarewicz W. Phys. Rev. C 69(1):014316 (2004)

    work page 2004

  58. [58]

    IOP Expanding Physics

    Schunck N. IOP Expanding Physics. Bristol, UK: IOP Publishing (2019), oCLC: 1034572493

    work page 2019

  59. [59]

    Nuclear Physics A 380(1):1–26 (1982)

    Dobaczewski J. Nuclear Physics A 380(1):1–26 (1982)

    work page 1982

  60. [60]

    Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 52(6):065104 (2025)

    Wibowo H, Backes BC, Dobaczewski J, de Groote RP, Nagpal A, et al. Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 52(6):065104 (2025)

    work page 2025

  61. [61]

    Springer Berlin, Heidelberg (2007)

    Suhonen J. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg (2007)

    work page 2007

  62. [62]

    Coupling of the odd nucleon with the subsystem of even nucleon numbers (2025), to be published

    Bonnard J, Dobaczewski J. Coupling of the odd nucleon with the subsystem of even nucleon numbers (2025), to be published

    work page 2025

  63. [63]

    Nature 607:260 (2022)

    Vernon AR, Garcia Ruiz RF, Miyagi T, Binnersley CL, Billowes J, et al. Nature 607:260 (2022)

    work page 2022

  64. [64]

    Dobaczewski J, Ba￿ czyk P, Becker P, Bender M, Bennaceur K, et al. J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 48(10):102001 (2021)

    work page 2021

  65. [65]

    Bally B, Bender M. Phys. Rev. C 103(2):024315 (2021)

    work page 2021

  66. [66]

    10 Angular Momentum Projection and Quadrupole Correlations Effects in Atomic Nuclei

    Egido J, Robledo L (2004). 10 Angular Momentum Projection and Quadrupole Correlations Effects in Atomic Nuclei. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 269–302

    work page 2004

  67. [67]

    Electromagnetic moments of ground and excited states calculated in heavy odd-N open-shell nuclei

    Dobaczewski J, Stuchbery AE, Danneaux G, Nagpal A, Sassarini PL, Wibowo H. Electro- magnetic moments of ground and excited states calculated in heavy odd- N open-shell nuclei (2025), arXiv:2509.26549

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  68. [68]

    Bally B, A vez B, Bender M, Heenen PH. Phys. Rev. Lett. 113(16):162501 (2014)

    work page 2014

  69. [69]

    Bonneau L, Minkov N, Duc DD, Quentin P, Bartel J. Phys. Rev. C 91(5):054307 (2015)

    work page 2015

  70. [70]

    Co’ G, De Donno V, Anguiano M, Bernard RN, Lallena AM. Phys. Rev. C 92(2):024314 (2015)

    work page 2015

  71. [71]

    Borrajo M, Egido JL. Eur. Phys. J. A 52:277 (2016)

    work page 2016

  72. [72]

    Physics Letters B 764:328 – 334 (2017)

    Borrajo M, Egido JL. Physics Letters B 764:328 – 334 (2017)

    work page 2017

  73. [73]

    Frontiers of Physics 13(6):132109 (2018)

    Li J, Meng J. Frontiers of Physics 13(6):132109 (2018)

    work page 2018

  74. [74]

    Péru S, Hilaire S, Goriely S, Martini M. Phys. Rev. C 104(2):024328 (2021)

    work page 2021

  75. [75]

    Bally B, Giacalone G, Bender M. Eur. Phys. J. A 58:187 (2022)

    work page 2022

  76. [76]

    Ryssens W, Scamps G, Goriely S, Bender M. Eur. Phys. J. A 58(12):246 (2022)

    work page 2022

  77. [77]

    Bally B, Giacalone G, Bender M. Eur. Phys. J. A 59:58 (2023)

    work page 2023

  78. [78]

    Magnetic dipole moments adjacent to doubly-magic nuclei in self-consistent mean-field theory with realistic spin-isospin and tensor forces (2025), arXiv:2508.12550

    Nakada H, Iwata H. Magnetic dipole moments adjacent to doubly-magic nuclei in self-consistent mean-field theory with realistic spin-isospin and tensor forces (2025), arXiv:2508.12550

    work page arXiv 2025

  79. [79]

    Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 49(11):11LT01 (2022)

    Sassarini PL, Dobaczewski J, Bonnard J, Garcia Ruiz RF. Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Particle Physics 49(11):11LT01 (2022)

    work page 2022

  80. [80]

    Nies L, Atanasov D, Athanasakis-Kaklamanakis M, Au M, Blaum K, et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 131(2):022502 (2023)

    work page 2023

Showing first 80 references.